Comparison websites 'break the law' over disabled users

They may spend millions of pounds on advertising campaigns featuring
mustachioed opera singers and cheeky meerkats, but some of the nation’s most
popular comparison websites have been accused of breaking the law by denying
access to more than 12m consumers with disabilities.

A new report has revealed that sites such as Confused.com, Comparethemarket.com, GoCompare.com, Kelkoo.co.uk and MySupermarket.com are ignoring basic web accessibility guidelines and do not have a base level of usability for those with disabilities. As a result. these consumers are being excluded from the cheapest deals at a time when they may need it most.

AbilityNet, a charity that helps those with disabilities use computers and the internet to improve their quality of life, carries out regular surveys across different sectors, looking at websites from the point of view of disabled and elderly users' experiences when using a range of services online. Its latest survey put price comparison websites under the microscope.

In addition to a series of manual checks, the charity tested sites using common adaptive technologies, such as screen readers, which read out aloud the content of the web page, and voice recognition software. Only sites that meet the needs of those with a vision impairment, dyslexia or physical limitations attain three stars or above.

The charity said that four of the price comparison sites tested earned just one star out of five, with Kelkoo scoring just marginally better with two. In other words, all five websites that were put to the test failed to "meet the minimum legal requirements for accessibility".

"The law is clear on this issue. It is just as illegal to bar disabled visitors from accessing your goods and services online as it would be to keep them out of your shop in the 'real world' ", said Robin Christopherson, head of digital inclusion at AbilityNet, who is himself blind.

"While no company would do this knowingly, this report shows there are plenty of high-profile sites that are contravening the Equality Act 2010 by not considering their disabled customers."

The Equality Act 2010 (EQA), which came into force in October 2010, replacing the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA) in England, Scotland and Wales, was introduced with the intention of dealing with the issue of disability discrimination. Among other things, the EQA prohibits discrimination by providers of services, goods and facilities.

According to law firm Pinsent Masons: "If a business has a website, it should be accessible to disabled users. There are ethical and commercial justifications for this, but there is also a legal reason: if the website does not meet certain design standards, then the company could be sued for discrimination."

To date, few companies have faced legal action for such discrimination. Although legal proceedings were initiated by the Royal National Institute for the Blind (RNIB) they were settled before they got to the courts.

The RNIB decided against naming the two companies. Legal experts anticipate that a higher-profile test case will be launched against a non-compliant website in the near future.

"Just like everyone else in these difficult times the country's 12 million disabled people want to get the best deal when they're shopping, whether that's for insurance, groceries or anything else," said Mr Christopherson. "But these cash-strapped shoppers are losing out due to badly designed web pages that prevent them from shopping around and accessing the online bargains they need to make ends meet."

In the UK, there are estimated to be 1.6 million people who are registered blind, 1.5 million with cognitive difficulties, a further 3.4 million people who are otherwise IT disabled and six million who have dyslexia. The total spending power of these groups is now estimated at £120bn a year.

The Telegraph contacted the five websites investigated in the report:

James Foord, at MySupermarket.com, said: "We take accessibility seriously. However, we are constantly refining the technology behind our site to make the shopping journey even easier, to enable as many people as possible to do their grocery shopping online from the comfort of their homes."

A spokesman at Comparethemarket.com said: "We are always looking at ways to improve what we do, and are currently reviewing AbilityNet's findings."

A spokesperson from Gocompare.com said: "We're keen that Gocompare.com should be easily accessible to as many users as possible. We welcome this report and have been in contact with AbilityNet in order to discuss how the site could be improved to enable easier access for people with disabilities."

Chris Simpson, chief marketing officer at Kelkoo.co.uk, said: "The AbilityNet review will enable us to look carefully at the findings of this research and, where possible, review our practices to improve this experience for disabled people. We have already scheduled further talks with AbilityNet to understand more about the study and how we can improve our score going forward."

Confused.com refused to comment.

'SWITCHING PLAN WAS DIFFICULT '

Wayne Walker, a national inclusion support adviser at Mencap, the learning disability charity, said: "Many people with disabilities are often on a much lower income or at least on a very tight budget, so the fact that these sites are inaccessible means that the people who would most benefit from access to cheaper deals are exactly the ones who are missing out."

In fact, Mr Walker, 33, said he himself found switching his energy provider through a price comparison website "too difficult".

"I have dyslexia and dyspraxia so I use special software where I can highlight the words on the computer and it will be read out loud," he said. "The way that these price comparison websites are set up, the software wouldn't work so I couldn't complete the switch and am stuck."

The report revealed that the comparison sites it tested often used text embedded within graphics which means that users cannot modify the text size or colour contrast. This is crucial for those with dyslexia or a vision impairment as it prevents screen reader users from reading the content when these images are left unlabelled.

The text size, particularly for headings and links, was "hard-coded" so could not be easily enlarged without appearing blurry and pixelated. Text labels attached to images on which blind visitors and text browser users rely for an explanation were often uninformative or completely absent, which according to the report means "navigation for a blind visitor is pure guesswork".

THE RIGHT CONTRAST

For Carole Gardiner, who is partially sighted, the way a website is designed will determine whether she can use it.

Ms Gardiner, from London, said that the right contrast is vital for her to access a website, yet many price comparison sites and online retailers are "not doing enough for disabled consumers" and as a result many are left out of pocket.

"All the good deals are on the internet," said Ms Gardiner, 65. "But if you can't use the price comparison websites or shop online because you have a disability and the site has not been designed for you to do so, you will end up paying more."

Ms Gardiner said: "The internet is the future, although when it comes to the disabled, some retailers are years behind."

EASIER NAVIGATION

Joanne Matthias of London has muscular dystrophy and said that she struggles to use price comparison websites and as a result many people with disabilities are missing out on potential bargains.

Mrs Matthias, 55, said: "Being in a wheelchair, buying online is much easier than going out to the shops myself, so it is even more important for internet retailers and price comparison sites to be accessible. Just like in a shop, these retailers have obligations and responsibilities to make their sites easy to use for people with disabilities."